Is there a moderator in the house ?

[Chairman]

I think this would be a good time for my "They should let Lockheed design all the airplanes" thread to get deleted rather than just locked.

Ian and I ended up talking about whether the ~5000 DC-3s the Russians built under license in the 1940's and 50's may have actually been unlicensed downloaded copies of American built planes (yes, of course it's nonsense, we'd have though anyone would have known that ...) and in that context I mentioned the name of a website, just once, which set creator2003 off. Then the fun went out of the whole thing, and it went downhill from there.

I imagine Creator wants it deleted too before google has a chance to cache it. Honestly, "for many reasons that even you can understand" ??? That's just sad.

Thanks
Gary


edit : Google's cache is up, and contains only my original post and the first reply.

[creator2003]

LOL set me off ...

The Post You are refering to Gary was fine apart from the part leading everyone off to the place i asked you to remove from your post ..
Reasons why i asked you have been outline after/and before you remove all of your posts from the topic ..

Here is some more ,
1.If the forum was to break our conditions the whole forum could be shut down by the host ..

2. Im really sure our sponsors of our screenshot comps and other developers of products would like to see those words to there work..(free)

Its really hard to tell people to do the simplest things without them getting all worked up over nothing ,i truely hope you get over it as i dont have that much time to waste playing pick on a MOD

If you want to have a little sling match my PM box or email creator2003@nzff.org is always open just dont expect a answer right away ,but i will get back to you as soon as i can

If you would like to go further you can always send the Admins of the forum a message ..

Thanks...

[toprob]

It's simpler than that, even.

QUOTE

4. No illegal material or content, including but not limited to: piracy, hacking, cracks, breach of copyright, impersonating other members of the forum (including administrators and moderators), racism or defamation;[/quote]

That's a forum rule, and you can read the rules from any page by clicking on the 'Rules and Guidelines' link in the top navigation bar.

Like all the rules, this is strictly adhered to. It is also purposefully vague, which allows it to be very widely interpreted by the moderators. Personally, I interpret it as ANY discussion of ANY of the listed topics. The last thing we want is to end up as THE place to go for information on any of these topics. Other forums have different rules, and some things which are freely expressed on other forums may be a no-go here, and vice versa.

This does bring up one issue which has caused more than a bit of confusion lately. Replying to perceived unacceptable posts can lead to escalating arguments (also against the rules:), but can also lead to very messy threads, after some posts have been removed or amended by a moderator. If anyone thinks that a post is in need of moderation, it is always best to contact a forum moderator or administrator. Most posts which break the rules will be moderated, but this can take time -- normally by the time I catch on to something which needs to be moderated, it can have a few replies which don't need to exist after moderation. Better to not post them in the first place.

So, if anyone does think that any post breaks the rules, I'd suggest:

-- if you are in a 'friendly' semi-live discussion with another member, PM them and point out that their particular post may breach the rules. They can then edit their post. Self-moderation -- I like it.
-- Otherwise contact a moderator. As I said, you may need to wait for a moderator, but they'll get the job done eventually.

[Chairman]

This whole thing blew up because I used the name of a warez site in a ridiculous discussion, not realising that in the eyes of some beholders even doing that would constitute directing people to the website, supporting the website, discussion of piracy, etc etc etc ... As you say it's a matter of interpretation and very vague.

Maybe the domain names of warez sites could be added to the swear filter so that it's no longer possible to use them ?

Thank you for getting rid of the original thread.

Gary

[pilot.masman]

In defense of the forum, I think the rules are fairly clear and pretty hard to misinterpret. Supposadly you are supposedto have read the rules before posting so any breach is there onwards yor fault. Afte all they ow. These forum and if they wished to make Ilit taboo to talk about flies or rabbits, who's gonna stop them? The forum police like team America but slightly different. Wow that was a waste of a post. LOL sorry... iPod touch = bad spelling

[victor_alpha_charlie]

QUOTE (pilot.masman @ Jun 3 2009, 04:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In defense of the forum, I think the rules are fairly clear and pretty hard to misinterpret. Supposadly you are supposedto have read the rules before posting so any breach is there onwards yor fault. Afte all they ow. These forum and if they wished to make Ilit taboo to talk about flies or rabbits, who's gonna stop them? The forum police like team America but slightly different. Wow that was a waste of a post. LOL sorry... iPod touch = bad spelling

On the topic of rules, from the Rules and Guidelines page:
"Use normal sentence structure and punctuation. Break long posts into paragraphs, and consider an extra line-break between paragraphs. Preview your posts for readability.

Check your spelling before posting -- either by rereading what you have posted, or if you are a poor speller by checking your spelling either using a spelling utility or a dictionary."

[pilot.masman]

That was one of my points LOL. I was trying to see how many rules I could break in one post . Nawww . Joking, just kinda hard doing all that stuff on a iPod touch. It corrects most of the stuff but it can't do it all. For instance cant becomes can't , usefull but not fool proof , and I'm one if those fools

[toprob]

QUOTE (pilot.masman @ Jun 3 2009, 04:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In defense of the forum, I think the rules are fairly clear and pretty hard to misinterpret.

Hmmm ... Toprob explicitly said two posts above yours that rule 4 was made deliberately vague so that the people who are in charge of Waving Big Sticks can interpret it to cover a multitude of sins.

But I'd have to agree with you - Rule 4 is (unhelpfully) clear on what it covers. It needs to have something genuinely vague like 'things that may bring nzff into disrepute' added.

Cheers
Gary


ps

QUOTE

Joking, just kinda hard doing all that stuff on a iPod touch. It corrects most of the stuff but it can't do it all. For instance cant becomes can't , usefull but not fool proof[/quote]
What if you actually meant to write cant ? It is a real word ...

Last edited by Chairman on Thu Jun 04, 2009 4:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

[toprob]

I wouldn't want any member to assume that they need to know every interpretation of every rule before posting -- some members won't know they have broken a rule until they are moderated. That's perfectly ok, and entirely normal. Sometimes, being moderated doesn't mean that you have done something wrong, it just means you have broken a rule. The rules are not designed to define right and wrong, but to protect the forum and members.

People arrive here from with a lot of different forum experiences, and it can take time to pick up the forum vibe. Some rules are aimed at preserving the family-friendly nature of NZFF (some simmers are very young...) and others are there just to keep the forum alive. The main cause of forum death is personal battles between members or groups of members, so we stomp on this hard.

Generally we keep discussions of moderation out of the forum -- you may notice a post there one minute and gone the next, without any published reason. That's just the moderators trimming and pruning to keep things tidy and running smoothly.

[Chairman]

Actually I hadn't noticed, which I guess is one of the nicest things you can say to a moderator ? (apart from "we've decided to start paying you")

Thanks
Gary

[pilot.masman]

QUOTE (Chairman @ Jun 4 2009, 04:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hmmm ... Toprob explicitly said two posts above yours that rule 4 was made deliberately vague so that the people who are in charge of Waving Big Sticks can interpret it to cover a multitude of sins.

But I'd have to agree with you - Rule 4 is (unhelpfully) clear on what it covers. It needs to have something genuinely vague like 'things that may bring nzff into disrepute' added.

Cheers
Gary


ps


What if you actually meant to write cant ? It is a real word ...

Yes the rules are left wide for staff to put their own judgement in, but for the non staff, I think the rules are fairly obvious and cover most of what they are against. It says no content etc related to p*racy and talking about p*racy is just that, so it went that wishy washy


edit: who censored my piracy

[ardypilot]

As Robin has said- please exercise a bit of common sense next time fellas. This topic does not need two whole threads dedicated it to it- next time just contact a moderator or administrator directly via PM if you have an issue.